Thursday, the State Dept's Brett McGurk Tweeted,
"Today in #Iraq, US air strikes against #ISIS terrorists destroyed four
armed vehicles, a humvee, tank, construction vehicle, &
checkpoint." AP notes this was the 106th US bombing in Iraq since August 8th.

Cedric and Wally
emphasized the financial cost on Friday noting that a cost of $7.5
million a day means at least $555 million through Friday which would be
over a half-billion dollars.

That's not coming out of US President Barack Obama's pocket, the US tax payer is footing the bill.

It's a bill that continues to grow.

The US taxpayer didn't authorize the bill and certainly wasn't consulted about putting more money on the tab.
They're not even informed what the plan is because there is no plan. Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) reports:

Amid conflicting congressional demands, impatient Arab
allies, and public concern that he will do too much or too little,
President Obama made bluntly clear Thursday why he has not yet
implemented a comprehensive U.S. response to the Islamist insurgency
that is rapidly spreading across the Middle East.“We don’t have a strategy yet,” Obama said, in response to questions about when he is prepared to begin military action in Syria, and, if not, why not?

White House spokesperson Josh Earnest has made the media rounds insisting that Iraq is not without a strategy, just Syria.

That's spin, not truth.

The White House continues to link Syria and Iraq so, if they have no plan for Syria, then they have no plan for Iraq.

The White House presents the Islamic State as darting back and forth
between Syria and Iraq -- which share a border -- and doing damage in
both countries as part of a larger, coherent plan to implement a
fundamentalist state.

Is that correct?

Who knows. They've never backed it up.

Asked why what is taking place is taking place, from the State Dept to
the White House, they can't provide concrete answers. They can talk
'barbaric' and other rhetoric. They can assert that the entire Middle
East is at risk and, more recently, that the US mainland is at risk.

It's a cute little fear fantasy.

It dissolves a bit if you apply common sense to it.

Syria and Iraq share a border.

Syria also shares a border with Turkey.

Is the Islamic State somehow intimidated by Turkey?

Or by Israel or Jordan?

Syria borders Iraq, Turkey, Israel and Jordan.

And just off the coast of Syria, to its west, you have the Republic of Cyprus.

If you were a terrorist group intent on taking territory -- which really
seems more like the goal of a group of invaders (and historically we've
not referred to such groups as terrorists) -- wouldn't Cyprus be your
first target?

It's small. It's an island -- meaning you could monitor incoming and
outgoing traffic much easier than with landlocked countries.

It's a bit of a resort island which, for most people, would say 'soft
target' -- especially when contrasted with a large country.

Syria's not responsible for Iraq but the US government has wanted war
with the Syrian government for some time. They wanted it under Bully
Boy Bush -- remember the diplomatic tiffs -- and they want it under
Barack.

A connection that Syria and Iraq do have -- that can be established
factually -- is that Sunnis and Shi'ites are going into both countries
to fight. In both countries -- and this is what has given IS its power
-- Sunnis feel persecuted.